1. Update on EM Calorimeters
Calorimeter Group

2. SoLID EM Calorimeter Overview
PVDIS forward angle
SIDIS forward angle
SIDIS large angle

3. Module Design @ last meeting
PS/Shower module shape: 6.25-cm- side hexagons (100cm2)
SPD: only basic design for SIDIS LAEC, no detailed segmentation

4. Updates since last meeting
Last time reported SPD, PID&trigger results for SIDIS FAEC including background. Today:
SPD for SIDIS FAEC: 60 azimuthal, 2 radial (85 → 127cm, 127 → 240cm), providing 5:1 g rej
SIDIS LAEC performance w/ SPD;
PVDIS: there have been several background updates (see baffle talk), PID and trigger performance with the latest baffle design;
PVDIS EC performance impact on DAQ.
Considering Multi-Anode PMT for Preshower and SPD
Updates on total EC cost estimate

5. March meeting – SIDIS FAEC PID w/ background
Rejection reduced due to preshower pile up
p efficiency
e efficiency
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.96
0.90
0.84
w/o background
w/ background
p(GeV)
p(GeV)
SoLID Collaboration Meeting 5

6. March meeting – SIDIS FAEC Trigger w/ background
p efficiency with cut
p efficiency with cut
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.55
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
HEX1+6 Trigger
> 1.95GeV
HEX1+6 Trigger
> 0.95GeV
E/p vs. p
E/p vs. p
* Accepted
* All
p(GeV)
p(GeV)

7. March meeting – Hexagon Calorimeter Pion Trigger Efficiency
p efficiency with cut
0.990
0.980
0.970
Trigger cut: HEX1+6 trigger raw signal > 85% MIP (which is MIP – 2σ = 220MeV calibrated)
Background passes this cut: rate ~20MHz, dominated by photon.
With a 5:1 photon suppression from SPD, we get ~4MHz total trigger rate, which fit in the DAQ limit (PR )
Will join global DAQ study for final verification
p(GeV)
E/p vs. p
* Accepted
* All
p(GeV)
SoLID Collaboration Meeting 7

8. SIDIS LAEC PID without background @ 94% electron efficiency
p efficiency with cut
Preshower(GeV) vs. E/p
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
p(GeV)
Preshower(GeV) vs. p
E/p vs. p
* Accepted
* All
p(GeV)
SoLID Collaboration Meeting, May 2013 8

9. SIDIS LAEC Background Components
Black: background, Red: electrons
Black: background, Red: pi-
Scintillator energy dep. in Shower (MeV)
Scintillator energy dep. in Shower (MeV)
Black: background, Red: pi-, blue: e-
Black: background, Red: pi-, blue: e-
Scintillator energy dep. in PS (MeV)
Scintillator energy dep. in Shower (MeV)
Photon (6GHz/6+1 Hex cluster) ← dominates
but well-shielded by the PS lead layer
Electron Pion- Pion+ Proton

10. SIDIS LAEC PID with background, inner R
Preshower(GeV) vs. E/p
electron efficiency
0.95
0.94
0.93
0.92
p(GeV)
Preshower(GeV) vs. p
E/p vs. p
* Accepted
* All
p(GeV)

11. SIDIS LAEC PID with background, inner R
p efficiency with cut
Preshower(GeV) vs. E/p
0.010
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
p(GeV)
Preshower(GeV) vs. p
E/p vs. p
* Accepted
* All
p(GeV)
still better than 94% e eff.

12. ~8:1 rejection with 30 segments
SPD for SIDIS LAEC
trigger rejection
Photon originated
Electron
Pion
Scintillator MIP rate (cm-2) 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2
1 < Eγ< 7 GeV
1 < Eγ< 2 GeV (dominant bg)
# segments
R (cm)
~8:1 rejection with 30 segments

13. PVDIS Performance with Background Using the Latest Baffle Design with CLEO Magnet

14. March meeting – PVDIS PID w/o background
pion efficiency
electron efficiency
0.030
0.025
0.020
0.015
0.010
0.005
0.000
1.00
0.98
0.96
0.94
0.92
0.90
0.88
0.86
0.84
0.82
0.80
PVDIS 28.5o
SIDIS FA 12.0o
SIDIS LA 20.5o
p(GeV)
p(GeV)
Preshower PID power drop significantly at this bin
Jin Huang
EC group Internal Communication

15. PVDIS background, Mid-R, High-rad f slice
Black: background, Red: electrons
Black: background, Red: pi-
Scintillator energy dep. in Shower (MeV)
Scintillator energy dep. in Shower (MeV)
Black: background, Red: pi-, blue: e-
Black: background, Red: pi-, blue: e-
Scintillator energy dep. in PS (MeV)
Scintillator energy dep. in Shower (MeV)
Photon (6GHz/6+1 Hex cluster)
Electron Pion- Pion+ Proton

16. PVDIS PID with background
with DC component removal PS 6+1 > MIP + Bgd + (2-3) σ SH 6+1>1.6 GeV
pion efficiency
electron efficiency
Inner radius, higher γ φ-band
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.94
0.92
0.90
0.88
0.86
Inner radius, lower γ φ-band
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
0.96
0.94
0.92
p(GeV)
p(GeV)

17. PVDIS PID with background
with DC component removal PS 6+1 > MIP + Bgd + (2-3) σ SH 6+1>1.6 GeV
pion efficiency
electron efficiency
Outer radius, higher γ φ-band
0.96
0.94
0.92
0.90
0.88
0.20
0.10
0.00
Due to Soft EM γ
Mid radius, higher γ φ-band
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00
Due to Hadron rate
0.94
0.90
0.86
p(GeV)
p(GeV)

18. PVDIS PID with background – does it meet the Physics requirement?
At inner radius, high-rad f region, EC pion rej. varies from 10:1 at 2 GeV to 50:1 at 8 GeV;
Using March CC talk, at 20deg, 2GeV/c, pi/e=200. CC provides 1000:1 rej w/o bg (worse if w/ bg). If EC provides 10:1 then pion contamination in e- samples would be 2% in offline analysis.
Main conclusion #1: Using 6+1 cluster sum isn't enough, must store all FADC waveforms to improve PID (factor of 10 expected using 4ns vs. 50ns timing);
Main conclusion #2: Pion asymmetry needed, must have clean pion trigger/events (very low electron contamination). Pion rate needed ~ ¼ of e- rate (estimated using 5% contamination, pion asym measured to 1%, causing 0.05% syst uncertainty in Apv)

19. SH 6+1>1.6 GeV (corresponds to 2 GeV electrons)
PVDIS Trigger with background
SH 6+1>1.6 GeV (corresponds to 2 GeV electrons)
pion efficiency
electron efficiency
Inner radius, higher γ φ-band, full bgd
0.60
0.50
0.40
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
100% pass for ~250 events/bin
Middle radius, higher γ φ-band, full bgd
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
p(GeV)
p(GeV)

20. SH 6+1>2.1 GeV (corresponds to 2.5 GeV electrons)
PVDIS Trigger with background
SH 6+1>2.1 GeV (corresponds to 2.5 GeV electrons)
pion efficiency
electron efficiency
Middle radius, higher γ φ-band, full bgd
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
1.00
0.70
0.40
Outer radius, higher γ φ-band, full bgd
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
p(GeV)
p(GeV) 20

21. PVDIS Trigger with background – Adding Preshower?
Shower cut: 6+1 cluster > 1.6 GeV
Preshower cut: central block > 1 MIP +1s p
2 GeV
8 GeV
mid R, high-rad f region
pion rej
e- eff.
~10:1
95%
~3:1
~98%
inner R, high-rad f region
90%
electron efficiency too low!
→ can't use Preshower in trigger

22. Current PVDIS Trigger Design
EC trigger will use Shower cut only: 6+1 cluster>1.6 GeV
Use EC+CC for electron trigger
Use EC+CC for pion trigger, but must be with prescaling (up to 100), see next page

23. How to Form PVDIS Trigger to meet DAQ Needs?
Trigger rate limit is ~60kHz/sector (total 30 sectors) – from DAQ group
Our expected DIS e- rate is 4-8kHz/sector, and assuming we need the same pion rate to extract pion asymmetry. This leaves 40kHz of pion contamination in e- trigger.
Electron trigger: If pi/e=100, pion rejection must be >20:1. Since EC provides only 2:1 (inner radius) to (5- 10):1 (outer radius), need CC to provide at least 10:1 rejection – Can CC provide this (with full background) at the trigger level?
Pion trigger: with kHz/sector raw pion rate, prescaling of 100 is necessary.

24. High radiation f region
PVDIS Radiation Dose
Photon (EM) ← dominant!
Photon (Pi0)
Electron
Pion- Pion+ Proton
High radiation f region
Low radiation f region
radiation per PAC month (rad)
radiation per PAC month (rad)
105
104
103
102 10 1
105
104
103
102 10 1
Layer ID
Layer ID

25. PVDIS Radiation Dose – Impact on fibers?
Dose expected: (20-40) krad/month
(80-160) krad for PVDIS 120 PAC days
( ) krad for 1 PAC year;
WLS fibers light loss:
Kuraray 10% loss (per → 30% @700krad;
St. Gobain 15% 100krad → 700krad.
Assuming 50% light loss, effect on PID is minimal as long as we calibrate the photon yield during running.

26. WLS Fiber radiation hardness
SoLID Collaboration Meeting 26

27. Budget Estimate Update

28. Budget @ January Meeting
5.8M, to be compared to next slide
+ Prototyping ~ 0.3 M$
+ Support ~
SoLID Collaboration Meeting
2828

29. Budget @ March Meeting IHEP (not including fibers) for 1700 PS+SH
Preshower: $112k-$120k
Shower: $549k-$651k
Structure+assembly: $255k-$340k
IHEP total: ($1.22-$1.51)M + 24% overhead (2012 rate) = ($1.51-$1.87)M
Fiber connectors+tubing (Leoni+other): ~$300k
WLS+clear fibers(?): $703k (S.G.) - $2.47M (Kuraray)
PMTs: $600x2x(~1900)=$2.28M
Total from above (no contingency): ($4.8M-$5.2M) if using S.G.; $( )M if using Kuraray
Labor? Shipping? Contingency?

30. Cost Update – Status No quote yet for SPD
No quote yet for Shower fiber mirrors (IHEP)
Updated fiber cost with diamond-tool cutting (do not know yet if IHEP can cut the fibers)
PMT cost with quote

31. Fiber Cost Update March 2013 May 2013 (fiber alone)
May 2013 (diamond-tool cutting)
S.G. WLS
$203k
$240k
S.G. Clear
$500k
$574k (longer)
$208k
Total
$703k
$777k
$448k
Kuraray WLS
$787k
$573k
Kurary clear
$1,681k
$1,091k (shorter)
$2,468k
$1,664k
$1,225k

32. PMT Cost Update March meeting: $600*2*(~1900)=$2.28M
Now: $400 PMT + $240 base = $640 *2*(~1900) = $2.43M

33. Budget Update IHEP (not including fibers) for 1700 PS+SH
Preshower: $112k-$120k
Shower: $549k-$651k
Structure+assembly: $255k-$340k
IHEP total: ($1.22-$1.51)M + 24% overhead (2012 rate) = ($1.51-$1.87)M
Fiber connectors+tubing (Leoni+other): ~$300k
WLS+clear fibers: $777k+$448k (S.G.) - $1.66M (Kuraray)
PMTs: $640x2x(~1900)=$2.43M
Total from above (no contingency): ($5.3M-$5.7M) if using S.G.
Labor? Shipping? Contingency?

34. Plan
Continue tweaking baffles to reduce background (but no significant change in PID expected)
LED calibration?
Reducing cost:
MAPMT study, perhaps even small-scale tests – potential saving of ~$800k
use CLAS12 cutter to cut fibers ourselves – potential saving of $448k, but need labor to cut ~190,000 fibers
Customized PMT bases?
Smaller PMTs for Preshower?

35. Possible Design Update – Multi-Anode PMTs
Current Preshower readout: 1 PMT ($600)/module, but each module is read out by only a couple of fibers so we are wasting cross-sectional area of the PMT;
MAPMT: about $100/channel → potential saving of PS PMT from $1.02M to $200k;
To be studied: gain-matching between channels of one MAPMT. LHCb used specialized front-end electronic modules to produce digital triggers. We could use FADC directly, no need for FE-electronics.

36. Backup Slides

37. Jin Huang <jinhuang@jlab.org>
Updated: Per-event pion rate for 1+6 hexagon cluster at Mid radius, high radiation slice
Electron (mostly absorbed in Pb)
Pion-
Pion+
+ 3 GHz photon not shown
Jin Huang
EC group Internal Communication 37

38. Jin Huang <jinhuang@jlab.org>
More detail in trigger cut Middle radius, higher γ φ-band, full bgd Shower Hex 1+6 trigger > 2.1 GeV
Pion Efficiency
Electron Efficiency
Jin Huang
EC group Internal Communication 38

39. Readout occupancy per shower channel for ~75MeV zero suppression
High radiation phi slice
Low radiation phi slice
Jin Huang
EC group Internal Communication 39